Do some people repeat that the disagreement of the imams and jurists on a legal issue is a mercy?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : This questioner says, “O honorable Shaykh, some people repeat that the disagreement of the imams or jurists on a legal issue is a mercy. Is this correct?”
The Shaykh : This is not correct.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : This statement is based on a hadith that is not authentic from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), which is “The disagreement of my Ummah is a mercy”. This hadith is not authentic. Rather, Allah the Exalted said:[Hud 11:118-119]
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes. If the disagreement is based on ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), then the person is in a state of ease. And it is from the mercy of Allah that if a disagreement occurs based on ijtihad, it does not harm the person who opposes the truth in the sight of Allah. In other words, if a person exerts effort in ruling on an issue and strives to reach the truth, but is not successful in hitting the truth, then Allah does not punish him for it, nor does he commit a sin. This is from the mercy of Allah, that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, does not hold accountable one from this Ummah who exerted effort and erred regarding the truth. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. A message from the brother Ahmad Hamdi, an Egyptian...
The Shaykh : And the summary.
The questioner : Please go ahead.
The Shaykh : The summary is that it is not correct to say that the disagreement of the Ummah is a mercy; rather, their agreement is the mercy. However, here is an issue: if a disagreement occurs among students of knowledge, is it permissible to make this disagreement in opinion and ijtihad a means to the disagreement of hearts, their alienation, their mutual hatred, and the loosing of their tongues against one another? The answer is no. It is absolutely not permissible to make the disagreement in opinion, where ijtihad is allowed, a cause for this. In fact, the reality is that if a man opposes you based on the evidence he has, he is not actually opposing you, because both of you want to reach the truth. In your belief, he is on the right, because he is obligated to follow what the evidence indicates according to his ijtihad. So he is on the right, and he has not actually opposed you. For this reason, disagreement occurred among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and it did not lead to a disagreement of hearts.
So it is obligatory for students of knowledge, if a disagreement occurs among them in matters where ijtihad and disagreement are permissible, that this disagreement not be a cause for their mutual hatred, alienation, and the loosing of their tongues against one another. Rather, a person should ask Allah for success in the truth for all of them. This is what is obligatory.
But as for the others who want to take the fatwas of these differing scholars.
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : What is the position of the questioner if he asks one person and he says, “This is lawful,” and asks another and he says, “This is forbidden”? Who is to be preferred? We say, first, if a person asks a scholar from among the scholars whose fatwas are taken due to trust in their knowledge and their trustworthiness, then he should not ask anyone else, because he only asked this scholar based on the assumption that what he says is the Shari'ah. So he should not go to another scholar to ask him, except if he asked this scholar out of dire necessity, such that he has no one to ask who is more knowledgeable and more trustworthy than this man, and he is waiting to reach a scholar more knowledgeable than him to ask him. In that case, there is no harm in asking another scholar, because he only asked the first scholar out of dire necessity. He is in the position of one who eats carrion out of dire necessity; if he finds lawfully slaughtered meat, he eats it.
As for if he asked him considering him to be the scholar who guides him to the truth and the Shari'ah, and it is not a question out of dire necessity, then the scholars say that one who asks a scholar who is committed to what he says and believes it to be the truth, it is not permissible for him to ask another scholar. This is unlike the manipulators of today, who, if they ask a scholar and he does not answer them with what they desire, they go to ask another scholar, seeking out dispensations. If they find one who agrees with their desires, they take his statement. This is not permissible. But if a person has not asked anyone up to now, and there are scholars before him whom he knows differ, should he ask the first or the second? We say he must ask the one he sees as closest to the truth due to the abundance of his knowledge, the strength of his religion, and his trustworthiness.
And the summary is that the agreement of the scholars is the good and the mercy. If that does not occur and they differ, then it is not permissible for this disagreement to be a cause for enmity, hatred, and the loosing of their tongues against one another. This is regarding the scholars.
As for the others who ask the scholars for fatwas, we say: if you ask a scholar whom you see as giving a fatwa that is the truth due to your trust in him, do not ask another scholar.
And if you ask a scholar out of dire necessity, such that there is no one in your place more knowledgeable than him, and it is your intention that if you reach the scholar who is more knowledgeable, you will ask him, then there is no harm in taking the statement of the first one until you find the scholar you see as more knowledgeable and more trustworthy.
And as for before asking, if there are multiple scholars before you, ask the one you see as closest to the truth due to the abundance of his knowledge and the strength of his religion. If he gives you a fatwa, take it. And if they are equal in your view, you are at liberty to choose between this one and that one.
The questioner : May Allah reward you, O honorable Shaykh, and may Allah bless you and your knowledge.
The Shaykh : This is not correct.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : This statement is based on a hadith that is not authentic from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), which is “The disagreement of my Ummah is a mercy”. This hadith is not authentic. Rather, Allah the Exalted said:
but they will not cease to differ. (119) Except whom your Lord has given mercy
وَلا يَزالونَ مُختَلِفينَ * إِلّا مَن رَحِمَ رَبُّكَThe questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes. If the disagreement is based on ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), then the person is in a state of ease. And it is from the mercy of Allah that if a disagreement occurs based on ijtihad, it does not harm the person who opposes the truth in the sight of Allah. In other words, if a person exerts effort in ruling on an issue and strives to reach the truth, but is not successful in hitting the truth, then Allah does not punish him for it, nor does he commit a sin. This is from the mercy of Allah, that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, does not hold accountable one from this Ummah who exerted effort and erred regarding the truth. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. A message from the brother Ahmad Hamdi, an Egyptian...
The Shaykh : And the summary.
The questioner : Please go ahead.
The Shaykh : The summary is that it is not correct to say that the disagreement of the Ummah is a mercy; rather, their agreement is the mercy. However, here is an issue: if a disagreement occurs among students of knowledge, is it permissible to make this disagreement in opinion and ijtihad a means to the disagreement of hearts, their alienation, their mutual hatred, and the loosing of their tongues against one another? The answer is no. It is absolutely not permissible to make the disagreement in opinion, where ijtihad is allowed, a cause for this. In fact, the reality is that if a man opposes you based on the evidence he has, he is not actually opposing you, because both of you want to reach the truth. In your belief, he is on the right, because he is obligated to follow what the evidence indicates according to his ijtihad. So he is on the right, and he has not actually opposed you. For this reason, disagreement occurred among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and it did not lead to a disagreement of hearts.
So it is obligatory for students of knowledge, if a disagreement occurs among them in matters where ijtihad and disagreement are permissible, that this disagreement not be a cause for their mutual hatred, alienation, and the loosing of their tongues against one another. Rather, a person should ask Allah for success in the truth for all of them. This is what is obligatory.
But as for the others who want to take the fatwas of these differing scholars.
The questioner : Yes, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : What is the position of the questioner if he asks one person and he says, “This is lawful,” and asks another and he says, “This is forbidden”? Who is to be preferred? We say, first, if a person asks a scholar from among the scholars whose fatwas are taken due to trust in their knowledge and their trustworthiness, then he should not ask anyone else, because he only asked this scholar based on the assumption that what he says is the Shari'ah. So he should not go to another scholar to ask him, except if he asked this scholar out of dire necessity, such that he has no one to ask who is more knowledgeable and more trustworthy than this man, and he is waiting to reach a scholar more knowledgeable than him to ask him. In that case, there is no harm in asking another scholar, because he only asked the first scholar out of dire necessity. He is in the position of one who eats carrion out of dire necessity; if he finds lawfully slaughtered meat, he eats it.
As for if he asked him considering him to be the scholar who guides him to the truth and the Shari'ah, and it is not a question out of dire necessity, then the scholars say that one who asks a scholar who is committed to what he says and believes it to be the truth, it is not permissible for him to ask another scholar. This is unlike the manipulators of today, who, if they ask a scholar and he does not answer them with what they desire, they go to ask another scholar, seeking out dispensations. If they find one who agrees with their desires, they take his statement. This is not permissible. But if a person has not asked anyone up to now, and there are scholars before him whom he knows differ, should he ask the first or the second? We say he must ask the one he sees as closest to the truth due to the abundance of his knowledge, the strength of his religion, and his trustworthiness.
And the summary is that the agreement of the scholars is the good and the mercy. If that does not occur and they differ, then it is not permissible for this disagreement to be a cause for enmity, hatred, and the loosing of their tongues against one another. This is regarding the scholars.
As for the others who ask the scholars for fatwas, we say: if you ask a scholar whom you see as giving a fatwa that is the truth due to your trust in him, do not ask another scholar.
And if you ask a scholar out of dire necessity, such that there is no one in your place more knowledgeable than him, and it is your intention that if you reach the scholar who is more knowledgeable, you will ask him, then there is no harm in taking the statement of the first one until you find the scholar you see as more knowledgeable and more trustworthy.
And as for before asking, if there are multiple scholars before you, ask the one you see as closest to the truth due to the abundance of his knowledge and the strength of his religion. If he gives you a fatwa, take it. And if they are equal in your view, you are at liberty to choose between this one and that one.
The questioner : May Allah reward you, O honorable Shaykh, and may Allah bless you and your knowledge.